Statistical Determination of the Social Science Curriculum

Abstract

The advance of the social sciences in the curriculum during the last twenty years has been nothing less than phenomenal, particularly in the secondary school where this subject has won the paramount place so long held by the so-called classics. The subject-matter in this field is plainly of prime importance in training for life and citizenship ; it is also so rich and varied as to make the problem of curriculum-building peculiarly formidable. It was inevitable that the new technique of measurement and statistical procedure should be called into service in the selection and or ganization of material ; this technique has proved its value in other fields, notably spelling and arithmetic, and will doubtless give aid in the social sciences. This article is written with the view that such statistical re search is desirable and indeed necessary, but is subject to peculiar haz ards, some of which it is the purpose of this paper to discuss. We may begin with one of the more ambitious projects in the field, namely, Washburne's study published in 1923 in the Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. This study pre sents a ranked list of 1500 persons, places, dates, and events (although strictly speaking, there are no dates as such in the list). The list is to form an objective basis for a fact course in history and geography. The 1500 topics are the boiled-down quintessence of some 80,000 mentions gathered from periodicals and books over a period of six years; each item in the final list is scored on the basis of its mentions, and the items under each score are ranked among themselves by a refine ment of the statistical process. The scores run from 103 down to six, items with scores below six hav ing been discarded. The report then declares that ' ' we thereby obtained a strictly objective ranking of all our items ... It shows, therefore, the relative importance of these items from the standpoint of enabling chil dren to read intelligently. A ?list of items taken from the extremes of Washburne 's list is given below to illustrate the problem under discussion. 41